Free Markets, Free People

Obama’s “news conference”

Such that it was.  4 things.

One: There were no ‘hard questions’.  If you look at the transcript you’ll note that the President called on reporters by name.  You know why, don’t you?

Two: The Susan Rice thing.  Let’s do a Candy Crowley and go to the transcript:

But for them to go after the U.N. ambassador, who had nothing to do with Benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous.

What’s outrageous is he just admitted that he didn’t say that Benghazi was a terrorist act as he asserted in a debate, or, one assumes, Ms. Rice wouldn’t have been spouting the video line.  If Obama knew on day two in the Rose Garden that it was a terrorist attack (and the only way he’d know was through intel reports), why didn’t Rice?

Three:

What I’m concerned about is not finding ourselves in a situation where the wealthy aren’t paying more or aren’t paying as much they should; middle-class families, one way or another, are making up the difference. That’s the kind of status quo that has been going on here too long, and that’s exactly what I argued against during this campaign. And if there’s — one thing that I’m pretty confident about is the American people understood what they were getting when they gave me this incredible privilege of being in office for another four years. They want compromise. They wanted action. But they also want to make sure that middle-class folks aren’t bearing the entire burden and sacrifice when it comes to some of these big challenges. They expect that folks at the top are doing their fair share as well, and that’s going to be my guiding principle during these negotiations but, more importantly, during the next four years of my administration.

I’m not sure how many times we have to publish the percentage of taxes the top 5%, 2% or 1% pay in comparison with the rest of the population, but in reality, they pay much more than their “fair share”.  This isn’t about “fair share’s”.  It’s about perpetuating a myth that taxing them more will ease the debt/deficit problem (as Dale has pointed out, it will yield about $42 billion) and give Obama someone to blame if “negotiations” fail.  This tax the rich scheme is the reddest of red herrings.

Four:  Perputuating the “Big Lie”:

You know, as you know, Mark, we can’t attribute any particular weather event to climate change. What we do know is the temperature around the globe is increasing faster than was predicted even 10 years ago. We do know that the Arctic ice cap is melting faster than was predicted even five years ago. We do know that there have been extraordinarily — there have been an extraordinarily large number of severe weather events here in North America, but also around the globe.

There has been no warming for the past 10 years, Arctic ice is fine, thank you very much, and there have not been an “extraordinarily large number of severe weather events” here.   In fact, we’re in a “hurricane drought” per the experts.

The good news, if you believe him, is that climate change will take a back seat to jobs and the economy.  How do we measure whether this is more Obama hot air (i.e. saying one thing, doing another) or he means it?

Watch the EPA.

~McQ

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

61 Responses to Obama’s “news conference”

  • Point three:  the middle class is making up the difference?  Uhhhh, no.  The deficit is.  Future taxpayers will be making up the difference.

  • Same old Obama…
    1. lies
    2. class warfare
    3. feigned outrage at any challenge to performance by the Obami
    4. jousting with straw-men
    5. “artful” language, accepted at face value by most Mushroom Media types
    6. loopy misrepresentations of objective facts, revealing a complete ignorance of various subjects
    No pivoting here.

  • Which is why I’m firmly in the “burn it down” camp now. Lets lay the smoking ruins at the feet of their fricking creepy cult leader 4 years from now.

    • PS- Latino poverty rate hovering around 30%. That’s what they voted for, so I’m happy they get it. I hope that number gets up to 50%

      • It doesn’t matter. Being poor here in the US beats the heck out of being poor in Mexico. I think they will still feel better off. I would.

    • Yep, the sooner we slam into the bottom, the sooner we can start building the scaffold to get back out of the hole.   The longer we fight it, the deeper the hole is going to get.
       
      I don’t want to face another election where people are even marginally uncertain about how much damage this clown has done or how far down into the hole the Democrats have dropped us with the willing help of their backscratching Gentry GOP brothers.

      • Its pretty much too late.  A complete bottoming will be a decades long affair to recover.  And I don’t just mean 1 or 2.  We’ll probably turn to socialism whole heartedly as a nation like England did which will add even more decades to finding our way back. 

    • See the whole fiscal cliff thing is a setup for the Republicans.  I wonder if they even realize this.  Its basically gong to come down to “we couldn’t balance the budget because the republicans protected the rich.” 

      Abstain from taxes on the rich being used to ‘solve the crysis’.  Let the Democrats have their way.  Let them take their money out of the country.  Let revenue bottom.  Call BO’s bluff. 

      • PLUS, just slam the door on all that “party of the rich BS”.  Go to WAR over ALLLLLLLL forms of corporate welfare, starting with Hollywood tax breaks and “special” accounting.  SLASH all ag subsidies, Delusional Energy subsidies, EVERY-FLUCKING-THING.  Top to bottom.  Make the WAR very, very public.  Leave the Collective naked and looking like they’ve been drug through a knot-hole backwards.

        • I think more people are agreeing on this strategy than before the election. This is healthy.
          But I suspect the house members will be more cautious because they are unsure what voters really want.

          • Time to learn what voters really want.  There is also this idea called “leadership”, where you sort of do stuff and explain why.
            IFFFFF, however, the GOP goes this route, they HAVE to be very clear, very vocal, and provide lots of “OK, we did this because Obama insisted.  Now that was the cause, and THIS is the effect“.  Otherwise, the Collective will successfully say, “Well, we all thought the same thing.  Nobody here got it right.”

      • That’s the way I see it.  Give him all the rope he wants, and his little dogs too.

      • See the whole fiscal cliff thing is a setup for the Republicans.  I wonder if they even realize this.  Its basically gong to come down to “we couldn’t balance the budget because the republicans protected the rich.”
        >>>> I agree. The tax increases he wants anyway are only a fraction of the problem so lets give him what he wants and then when the deficit is basically untouched, we’ll see what happens. Boehner’s best move is to fold on this.

        • Which means Boehner will fight to the death on this issue. Sigh.

          • Absolutely.  He’s got to protect the Republican Brand.
             
            Then he’ll agree to a halfway increase anyway which will still let the Republicans get all the blame.

  • “ou know, as you know, Mark, we can’t attribute any particular weather event to climate change. What we do know is the temperature around the globe is increasing faster than was predicted even 10 years ago. We do know that the Arctic ice cap is melting faster than was predicted even five years ago. We do know that there have been extraordinarily — there have been an extraordinarily large number of severe weather events here in North America, but also around the globe.”
     
    Can’t have a Carbon tax without a bullshit excuse for a Carbon Tax now can we?

    • The good news, if you believe him, is that climate change will take a back seat to jobs and the economy.
      You know that even they don’t really believe it when they would supplant “saving the world” for a few measly jobs.

      • Not that any money from a Carbon Tax will actually go towards anything that will, ya know, actually have anything to do with global warming, it’ll go towards other spending, like, um, entitlements….

    • They’re not doing a tax anymore it seems.  They’re just going to shutoff coal plants for now.

      • Oh hell, I’ll take bets on that one.    Unless  “any more” means “this month”.   Come, oh, say, March of 2013, let’s see if we’re having this conversation again.   Carbon tax is jussssssst too good an opportunity to punish polluters and save the world for entitlements.  We’ll be back on this page in no time.  What better way to ‘fundamentally’ change the country.
         
         

  • Regarding the Climate stuff, Joe Bastardi had a couple of great responses to both HuffPo’s post about Sandy being proof, and the President’s comment.

    Liberty Chick got him to comment, and he did an awesome job…

  • You must realize that ‘terrorism’ is a vague and ambiguous term—look its definition.  Basically any form of violence can be considered terrorism, in that it’s the use of force to intimidate.  Obama was simply talking about a different form of terrorism than that which Romney was thinking.  That’s a major problem with conservative thinking:  It’s narrow, and black and white—they think everybody thinks like they do.
    Similarly, what’s fair to one, isn’t fair to another—linear vagueness.  Gaining increased revenue from the wealthy isn’t the whole solution; but it could be part of it.  That’s another problem with conservative thinking:  If a solution doesn’t solve the whole problem, it’s invalid.  But they, like Romney, can’t offer a valid, total solution themselves.  Or, like Bush, they can only initiate problems.
    Their theories or pseudo-scientific facts are only agreed upon by a very limited number of conservative people—and most conservatives don’t even believe in evolution or big bang (but the scriptural account instead).

    • Tad, you don’t even think.

    • “they think everybody thinks like they do.”
       
      Actually, no. We realize some people don’t think at all.
       
      “That’s another problem with conservative thinking:  If a solution doesn’t solve the whole problem, it’s invalid.”
       
      Uh, yeah. If a solution doesn’t solve a problem, it is not, by definition, a solution. If you want to be a witch doctor and wave a chicken bone, chant , and do a little dance, fine. But don’t claim you have a solution to appendicitis.

      • And we simply have NO experience with “tax and spend”, so we have to TRY that.  Right…?
        And all that MATH stuff…and all that human behavior stuff…just IGNORE that.  Why, hell, “the rich” are just gonna line up and be fleeced…which will ONE TIME finance a week of spending.  But they won’t adapt to lower their liability.  Why, of course not…!!!

      • Yes, all problems must have comprehensive solutions that involve 2,000 page bills that no one has read.
        Which party is passing these bills instead of working on aspects of the problem one by one?

    • “Similarly, what’s fair to one, isn’t fair to another—linear vagueness. ”  so, you understand that concept do you?   This is why WE seldom use the word “fair” Tad, except to be sarcastic, because it’s a meaningless metric and we know it.   Most discussion of words and their meaning originating on the progressive side of the world is crap – Democrats are the same people who for years have claimed that a reduction in desired NEW spending is a ‘cut’.
       
      “and most conservatives don’t even believe in evolution or big bang (but the scriptural account instead).”
      Wanting to curtail spending, secure the boarder, limit government, protect the inalienable rights of individuals from encroachment of the State  have nothing to do with the religious overtones (or non-religious, as the case may be) you’ve attached to evolution or the big bang.  Only an ignorant asshat would assume that ‘conservatives’ are mostly and necessarily fundamentalist Christians.

      • Or, like Bush, they can only initiate problems.

        Wow.  Talk about superstitious “magical thinking”!  How many Bush policies…including the across-the-board tax rate reductions…has Obama aped?

      • The WSJ had a story a few decades back about how being “fair” and “fairness” were almost uniquely an American idea.
        In fact, in some languages, there is no equivalent word for “fair.”

    • Oh, don’t worry Tad. I can assure you right now that I will lose no sleep over the idea of terrorism in some of the big cities. Obama’s halo will keep everyone there safe, basking in the soft warm glow of big-government beneficience

    • What a simpleton.

    • You do know the “big bang” theory was first proposed by a Roman Catholic priest, don’t you Tad?

       

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre

       

  • Why the Susan Rice thing is important:

    Many, many people have ended up under Obama’s bus.  But to date everyone knows why those who ended up under there did.  Whether they deliberately or accidentally made the dear leader look bad, they hurt or threatened to hurt perceptions of Obama.  Susan Rice has not, she played good follower and lied on all the Sunday news shows just as she was told.  If she goes under the bus for being a good follwer rather than for being a bad follower, that changes the dynamics.   Every one of Obama’s followers is thinking ‘If I do right by the dear leader, I don’t go under the bus.”  Susan Rice has the possibility of changing that.  That can create fear…right now, if they don’t let the dear leader down, they are not afraid, but if Susan Rice is penalized, that can change loyalty among many.   

    Obama needs Susan Rice confirmed.  Maybe even bad enough to face Benghazi questions.  He is ripe for calling out…McCain, Graham and Ayotte have been called out.  Do NOT stand in the way of me rewarding my loyal, if dishonest, followers. 

    They can say, “Mr. President, you asked us to address our concerns to you rather than your nominee.  Very well, your administration knew, either based on live video feed, or at a maximum within hours, that the Benghazi attack was not about the Video.  Yet you or someone in your administration sent our UN Ambassador, who by your own statement had no relevant knowledge, to lie to the American people about it.  Was deliberately misleading of the American people done on your orders, or with your understanding, or did someone else do that without your knowledge and consent?  If the latter, who, and when will they be fired?”

    Mr. McCain, you faced circumstances that required heroism in North Vietnam.  Your country needs you to be heroic again.  Do not back down from the President’s challenge; step up and confront him.    

  • But for them to go after the U.N. ambassador, who had nothing to do with Benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous.
     
    See, this is hilariously ironic, since when President Bush used “the intelligence he had received*” to claim Iraq had WMD programs and almost certainly had WMDs, it was all “Bush lied, people died!”.
     
    Because it’s “lying” to listen to the CIA when they’re wrong… if you’re a Republican President?
     
    (* Anyone still believing he “lied” is invited to read the Robb-Silberman Report and notice that while the Democrat majority tries really, really hard to pin some sort of deceit on the President, all they manage is to say … that the CIA was wrong about it.)

  • Buttcrack Obama is going to “fundamentally transform the United States” (into what, he doesn’t say) in the same way I “fundamentally transformed” a three topping pizza into a mass of poop.

  • Well you didn’t expect him to suddenly start telling the truth did you?

  • republicans in the house should pass a law that anyone making over 250K gets no deductions and anything above 2540k is taxed at 100%. Then dare Obama to veto the tax on the rich.
     

    • I personally figure that a 50% on everything over $10 million should do it.

    • And we should go after the trust fund kids too, like the Heinz Kerrys, the Kennedys,   We should just get it over with and tax their WEALTH.  Let’s REALLY tear the place up and make things ‘fair’.

      • Oh, no….  Don’t stop there.  Go after all the Ivy League’s endowments, and all the rich foundations!  Take it ALLLLL…

        • But of course.   They didn’t actually EARN that wealth, they didn’t do it alone, they didn’t build that.   Time to spread it around, to make it fair.

  • By the way, all of this only reinforces my belief that the CIA is a horrible, useless, evil, noxious ridiculous and unnecessary agency and should be eliminated, bulldozed, and salt should be sown into the site of it’s building.

  • NO MORE TWINKIES?!!!!!!  The horror, the horror.
     
    Captain Obama better put on the fasten seat belt sign, it’s gonna be a bumpy ride with no Twinkies.

    • Oh, I kinda expect him to nationalize the Twinkie, and give control to the union.  Imagine a crap-cake equivalent of the Volt.

      • I am waiting to see his reaction – Twinkies….as American as apple pie – 82 years, they survived the Great Depression.  Poof.
        \  ”   /
        > poof <
        /  ”   \
         
        I’m loving my new country.